BIR ISSUANCES FOR THE MONTH OF OCTOBER

OCTOBER 2009 VOLUME II, ISSUE No. 10

L C A L C A L C A
LINES LINES LINES
Inside this issue:
BIR issuances
for the month
of October
(continuation)
2
Securities and
Exchange
Commission
Circular No.
14 Series of
2009
3
Jurisprudence 4
JLs Corner 10




REVENUE REGULA-
TIONS NO. 8-2009


RR No. 8-2009 is
issued to further
amend Sections
2.57.2 and 2.57.3
of RR No. 2-98, as
amended, Subject-
ing to Creditable
Withholding Tax the
Income payments
made by Political
Parties and Candi-
dates of Local and
National Elections of
all their Campaign
Expenditures and
Income Payments
made by an Individ-
ual or Juridical Per-
son forming part of
their campaign con-
tributions to Candi-
dates of Local and
National Elections
and to Political Par-
ties.

The amendments to
Section 2.57.2 (w)
of RR No. 2-98, as
amended, states
that Income Pay-
ments made by Po-
litical Parties and
Candidates of Local
and National elec-
REVENUE MEMO-
RANDUM ORDER
NO. 31-2009


This Order is being
issued to prescribe
the policies and
guidelines that shall
govern the declara-
tion of casualty loss-
es incurred by tax-
payers, and the re-
porting of such loss-
es filed at the con-
cerned Revenue Dis-
trict Offices (RDOs).
The requirements for
the filing of Claims of
Casualty Losses are
as follows:

1. Sworn declara-
tion of Loss, to
be filed within
forty five (45)
days after the
date of the event
stating the fol-
lowing:

Nature of the
event that gave
rise to such loss
(es), and the
time of its occur-
rence;

Description and
location of the
tions of all their
campaign expendi-
tures, and Income
Payments made by
Individuals or Juridi-
cal Persons for their
purchases of goods
and services intend-
ed to be given as
campaign contribu-
tion to Political par-
ties and Candidates
shall be subjected
to Withholding Tax
rate of Five percent
(5 %).

The amendments to
Section 2.57.3 of
RR No. 2-98 (D), as
amended, states
that all Individuals,
Juridical Persons
and Political Parties,
with respect to their
income payments
made as campaign
expenditures and/or
purchase of goods
and services intend-
ed as campaign
contributions shall
constitute the per-
sons required to
withhold for purpos-
es of the creditable
tax required to be
withheld.

damaged
property(ies);

Items needed
to compute
the loss(es),
such as:

Cost or
other ba-
sis of the
property
(ies);
Deprecia-
tion al-
lowed, if
any;
Value of
the prop-
erty(ies)
before
and after
the event;
Cost of
repair

Amount of
insurance or
other com-
pensation re-
ceived or re-
ceivable

1.1. The
sworn
Declara-
tion of
Loss
must be
supported by
the following
documents:

The Financial
St at ement s
for the year
i mmedi atel y
preceding the
event; and,
Copies of the
I n s u r a n c e
Policy(ies), if
any, for the
c o n c e r n e d
p r o p e r t y
(ies).
2. Proof of the elements
of the l oss(es)
claimed, such as, but
not limited to, the
following:

Photographs of the
property(ies):

Photographs
showing the
property(ies)
before the ty
phoon; and,

Photographs
taken after the
typhoon, showing
the extent of
the damage sus
tained

Documentary evi-
dence for determin-
ing the cost or valua-
tion of the damaged
property(ies), such
as, but not limited
to: cancelled checks,
vouchers, receipts,
and other evidence
of costs

Insurance policy, in
the event that there
is an insurance cov-
erage for the proper-
ty(ies)

Police report, in cas-
es of robbery, theft
during the typhoon
and/or as a conse-
quence of looting.

Failure to report a theft
or robbery can be held
against the taxpayer.
However, a mere report
of an alleged theft or
robbery to the police au-
thorities is not conclusive
proof of the loss arising
therefrom.

All documents and other
evidence submitted to
prove such loss(es) shall
be subject to verification
by the concerned Bureau
office, and should be
kept by the taxpayer as
part of his tax records,
and be made available to
the duly-authorized Rev-
enue Officer(s), upon
audit of his Income Tax
Return and the declara-
tion of loss.

The Requisites for de-
ductibility are as follows:
1. A taxpayer engaged
in trade or business
may be entitled to
claim, as business
deductions, casualty
losses incurred for
properties actually
used in the business
enterprise that were
damaged and report-
ed as losses in the
appropriate declara-
tion filed with the
BIR. The loss of as-
sets not used in the
course of business
and/or are personal
in nature shall there-
fore not be allowed.

2. Properties shall be
reported as casualty
losses must have
been properly report-
ed as part of the tax-
payers assets in the
taxpayers account-
ing records and fi-
nancial statements in
the year immediately
preceding the occur-
rence of the loss,
with the costs of ac-
quisition clearly es-
tablished and recod-
ed. Otherwise, the
claim for deduction
shall not be allowed.
3. The recovery of cas-
ualty losses through
i nsurance cl ai ms
shall be governed by
the guidelines set
forth in Revenue
Regulations (RR) No.
12-77. Moreover, the
amount of loss that
shall be compensated
by insurance cover-
age should not be
claimed as a deducti-
ble loss.

3.1. If the insurance
proceeds exceed
the net book
value of the
damages assets,
such excess
shall be subject
to the regular
Income Tax, but
not to the Value
-Added Tax,
since the indem-
nification is not
an actual sale of
goods by the
insured compa-

Page 2 L C A LINES
ny to the insur-
ance company.

4. In addition to the poli-
cies prescribed in RR
No. 12-77 relative to
the substantiation of
casualty losses arising
from typhoons and
other natural disas-
ters, the following
guidelines shall be
observed:

4.1. The deduction of
assets as capita
losses must be
properly recorded
i n accounti ng
reports, with the
adjustment of
the applicable
accounts. The
accounting entry
to record this
action is illustrat-
ed as follows:

In the event of a total
loss/ destruction of prop-
erty(ies) used in the busi-
ness enterprise, the net
Debit
Casualty
loss
Accumu-
lated
Depreci-
ation
P
xx,xxx,xxx
.xx


xx,xxx,xxx
.xx
Credit
Proper-
ty / As-
set Ac-
count
P
xx,xxx,xxx
.xx
book value (costs less
accumulated deprecia-
tion) immediately pre-
ceding the natural disas-
ter should be used as the
basis in claiming casualty
losses, and shall be re-
duced by the amount of
insurance proceeds re-
ceived.

4.2. The restoration
of the damaged
property, or the
acquisition of
new property to
replace it, must
be properly rec-
orded and rec-
ognized as ei-
ther :
A. a repairs
expense;
or,
B. a capital-
ized asset.

A Final Report on Casual-
ty losses must be sub-
mitted, following the
aforesaid channels, not
later than December 10,
2009. A Consolidated
Report shall then be sub-
mitted by the Deputy
C o m m i s s i o n e r
(Operations Group) to
the Commissioner not
later than December 31,
2009.










SECURITIES AND EX-
CHANGE COMMISSION
CIRCULAR NO. 14 SE-
RIES OF 2009



Issued in 20 October
2009 the circular was
issued to maintain an
organized and orderly
filing of Financial State-
ment (FS), the Commis-
sion pursuant to its au-
thority under the Corpo-
ration Code and Securi-
ties Regulation Code,
resolved in its meeting
the following measures in
the filing of the FS of
companies whose fiscal
year ends on 31 Decem-
ber 2009:

1. All corporations, in-
cluding branch offic-
es, representative
offices, regional
headquarters and
regional operating
headquarters of for-
eign corporations,
that file their FS at
the Commissions
head office shall, de-
pending on the last
numerical digit of
their SEC registration
or license number, be
governed by the fol-
lowing schedule in
the filing period for
2010:

2. Corporations whose
fiscal year ends on a
date other than 31
December 2009 shall
comply with their
original filing sched-
ule;

3. Prior to 19 April 2010,
all corporations may
file their FS regard-
less of the last nu-
merical digit of their
registration or li-
cense number;

4. Late filing shall be ac-
cepted starting 17
May and shall be
subject to the pre-
scribed penalties
which shall be com-
puted from the date
of the last day of
filing schedule stated
in paragraph 1;

5. Any filing made before
or after the sched-
uled dates shall not
be accepted unless
covered by para-
graphs 3 and 4;

6. Except for the forego-
ing changes, (a) all
the rules on the
preparation and sub-
mission of the FS,
such as, but not lim-
ited to, proof of filing
of the FS with the
Bureau of Internal
Revenue or any of its
authorized agent
banks, and registra-
tion of the corpora-
tions auditor with
the Board of Ac-
countancy shall con-
tinue to be in effect;
and (b) the existing
period for the filing
by listed companies
of their FS at the
Philippine Stock Ex-
change, i.e., 105
Page 3 VOLUME II, ISSUE No. 10
days after the end
of the fiscal year,
shall remain un-
changed; and

7. All FS that meet the
basic acceptance
criteria shall be re-
ceived subject to
the commissions
review of its form
and contents. Any
deficiency in the
filing or deviation
from prescribed ac-
counting and audit
standards that may
be found during the
review shall subject
the company con-
cerned, its officers
and auditors to ap-
propriate penalties
for violation of SRC
Rule 68 and other
applicable rules and
regulations.
























PEOPLE OF THE PHIL-
IPPINES

April 19,
20, 21,
22, 23
1, 2,
3
April 26,
27, 28, 29
4 and
5
May 3, 4,
5, 6, 7
6, 7,
8
May 11,
12, 13, 14
9 and
0
JURISPRUDENCE
Page 4 L C A LINES
versus
FEBLONELYBIRTH T.
RUBIO AND JOAN T.
AMARO
G.R. No. 179748, Octo-
ber 2, 2009



FACTS: Feblonelybirth T.
Rubio (Rubio) and Joan T.
Amaro (Amaro) took turns
in having carnal
knowledge with a girl
named AAA, a minor,
against her will and, that
on the occasion of the
said rape and for the pur-
pose of silencing her, Ru-
bio and Amaro in pursu-
ance of their conspiracy
and using bladed weapons
attacked, assaulted and
stabbed the victim.

ISSUE: Whether or not
the prosecution failed to
prove with moral certainty
that Rubio and Amaro
were the perpetrators of
the crime charged.

RULING: The prosecu-
tion failed to prove with
moral certainty that Rubio
and Amaro were the per-
petrators of the crime
charged.

Under the Rules on Evi-
dence, circumstantial evi-
dence is sufficient for con-
viction if:

(a) There is more
than one circum-
stance;

(b) The facts from
which the inferences
are derived are prov-
en; and

(c) The combination
of all the circumstanc-
es is such as to pro-
duce a conviction be-
yond reasonable
doubt.

To assay its probative
value,

circumstantial evi-
dence must be tested
against four necessary
guidelines:

x x x x (a) It should
be acted upon with
caution; (b) All the
essential facts must
be consistent with the
hypothesis of guilt; (c)
The facts must ex-
clude every other the-
ory but that of guilt of
the accused; and, (d)
The facts must es-
tablish with certain-
ty the guilt of the
accused as to con-
vince beyond rea-
sonable doubt that
he was the perpe-
trator of the of-
fense. The peculiari-
ty of circumstantial
evidence is that the
series of events
pointing to the com-
mission of a felony is
appreciated not sin-
gly but collectively.
The guilt of the ac-
cused cannot be
deduced from scru-
tinizing just one
(1) particular piece
of evidence. It is
more like a puzzle
which when put
together reveals a
convincing picture
pointing to the
conclusion that the
accused is the au-
thor of the crime.
(Italics in the origi-
nal; emphasis and
underscoring sup-
plied)

Far from being a com-
pleted puzzle, the cir-
cumstantial evidence
adduced in this case only
serves to inculpate doubt
in an unprejudiced mind
as to the real identities
of the perpetrators of the
crime.

Central to the present
cases uncertainty are
the glaring inconsisten-
cies in the testimonies
and oddities in the reac-
tions of the prosecution
witnesses that cannot be
conveniently overlooked
nor easily dismissed as
products of faulty
JURISPRUDENCE
Page 5 VOLUME II, ISSUE No. 10
memory for they bear on
credibility of testimony,
which is all the more ma-
terial in the determina-
tion of the existence of
circumstantial evidence.

Still, even if the Su-
preme Court (SC) were
to credit the identifica-
tion of Rubio and Amaro
as the ones seen running
away from the crime
scene, this is the only
circumstance that was
established during the
trial. Such circumstance
certainly does not meet
the first requisite for cir-
cumstantial evidence to
be sufficient to convict.

Further still, even if Ru-
bio and Amaro were seen
carrying bloodied hunting
knives, there is no show-
ing that they matched
the instruments, if it was
more than one, used in
stabbing AAA vis--vis
the size of the wounds in
her body.

A judgment of conviction
must rest on nothing less
than moral certainty,
moral certainty in an un-
prejudiced mind that it
was the accused who
committed the crime,
failing which the accused
must be exonerated.
The prosecution failed to
discharge its burden of
establishing the guilt of
appellants, however.
This leaves it unneces-
sary to still pass on Ru-
bio and Amaros defense.


GERMAN CAYTON and
the HEIRS OF THE
DECEASED SPOUSE
CECILIA CAYTON
Versus
ZEONNIX TRADING
CORPORATION;
SPOUSES VICENTE
MAOSCA
and LOURDES MAOS-
CA; MAXIMO CONTRE-
RAS,
Ex-Officio Sheriff; and
PABLO L. SY,
Senior Sheriff for Ma-
kati, Metro Manila
G.R. No. 169541 Octo-
ber 9, 2009


FACTS: A resi-
dential house and lot
located in Sucat, Para-
aque is registered in
the name of Vicente Ma-
osca, married to
Lourdes Maosca
(Maoscas).

The Maoscas executed
a deed of real estate
mortgage over the house
and lot as security for
the loan of P150,000.00
that they obtained from
Family Savings Bank
(FSB).

A levy on attachment
was annotated in favor
of Zeonnix Trading Cor-
poration (Zeonnix) pur-
suant to a writ of prelim-
inary attachment issued
by the Court of First In-
stance of Pasay City in a
civil case against the Ma-
oscas. The case was re
-raffled to the Regional
Trial Court (RTC) of Ma-
kati.

A Deed of Absolute Sale
with Assumption of Mort-
gage was executed be-
tween the Maoscas and
the spouses German G.
Cayton and Cecilia R.
Cayton (Caytons) over
the subject house and lot
for the amount of
P160,000.00. As part of
the consideration, the
Caytons assumed pay-
ment to FSB of the real
estate mortgage amorti-
zations on the property.
The Caytons also paid
the real estate taxes on
the property beginning in
1982.

The Caytons failed to
register the deed of ab-
solute sale with assump-
tion of mortgage because
the owners duplicate
copy was in the posses-
sion of FSB in view of the
loan of the Maoscas
wherein the property
was used as security.

Meanwhile, the Regional
Trial Court (RTC) in the
pending civil case ruled
in favor of Zoennix.

Subsequently, the Cay-
tons defaulted in the
payment to FSB of the
monthly amortizations,
and the property was
extrajudicially foreclosed.
The property was sold at
public auction. The Cay-
JURISPRUDENCE
Page 6 L C A LINES
tons were declared as
the highest bidder and a
Certificate of Sale was
issued.

The Caytons filed before
the RTC in a civil case for
quieting of title and/or
removal/prevention of
cloud on title against
Zeonnix.

Zeonnix, as judgment
creditor of the Maoscas
offered to redeem the
property by tendering to
the RTC of Makati the
purchase price of the
property and interest
that had accrued there-
on.
RTC rendered a Decision
in favor of the Caytons
and against Zeonnix.
The Court of Appeals
(CA) reversed the RTC
Decision.

The Caytons filed a mo-
tion for reconsideration
but the same was de-
nied.
ISSUE: Whether or not
Zoennix has acquired by
operation of law the right
of redemption over the
foreclosed properties.

RULING: Zeonnix has
acquired by operation of
law the right of redemp-
tion over the foreclosed
properties.

The Caytons are succes-
sors in interest of the Ma-
oscas. However, their
supposed title or right
over the property is un-
registered and, as such,
the same cannot affect
third persons. This is be-
cause it is registration
that is the operative act
to convey or affect the
land insofar as third per-
sons are concerned. A
deed, mortgage, lease, or
other voluntary instru-
ment, except a will, pur-
porting to convey or af-
fect conveyance involving
registered land, shall not
take effect as a convey-
ance or bind the land but
shall operate only as a
contract between the par-
ties and as evidence of
authority of the Register
of Deeds to make regis-
tration.
The unregistered sale of
the house and lot to the
Caytons by the Maoscas
cannot prejudice the
right of redemption
granted by law in favor
of Zeonnix. The levy on
attachment of Zeonnix
on the subject property
was duly recorded.
Thus, the levy on attach-
ment created a construc-
tive notice to all persons
from the time of such
registration.

When a conveyance has
been properly recorded,
such record is construc-
tive notice of its contents
and all interests, legal
and equitable, included
therein. Under the rule of
notice, it is presumed
that the purchaser has
examined every instru-
ment of record affecting
the title. Such presump-
tion is irrefutable.





EUGENIO T. REVILLA,
SR.
versus
THE COMMISSION ON
JURISPRUDENCE
Page 7 VOLUME II, ISSUE No. 10
ELECTIONS and
GERARDO L. LANOY

G.R. No. 187428
October 16, 2009

FACTS: Eugenio T. Re-
villa, Sr. (Revilla) and
Gerardo L. Lanoy
(Lanoy) were candidates
for Punong Barangay
2007 barangay elections.
When the votes were
counted, the results
showed that Revilla gar-
nered 309 votes as
against the 307 votes
garnered by Lanoy. The
Barangay Board of Can-
vassers thus proclaimed
Revilla as the duly elect-
ed Punong Barangay.

Lanoy then filed an elec-
tion protest before the
Municipal Circuit Trial
Court (MCTC) against
Revilla.

After revision, it ap-
peared that Lanoy gar-
nered 312 votes while
Revilla got only 311.
Consequently, the MCTC
decided in favor of La-
noy.

Revilla filed a notice of
appeal from the MCTC
decision and paid the
assessed appeal fee.
The MCTC ordered the
transmittal of the records
to the COMELEC for ap-
propriate action.

The COMELEC Second
Division issued an Order
dismissing the appeal for
failure to pay the appeal
fee in accordance with
COMELEC Resolution No.
8486.

Revilla paid the appeal
fee and filed a motion for
reconsideration of the
Order.

The COMELEC Second
Division denied the mo-
tion for reconsideration
because the payment
was not made in full as
required by COMELEC
Resolution No. 02-0130.

Revilla paid the differen-
tial amount of the motion
fee and filed a second
motion for reconsidera-
tion. Upon learning about
it, Lanoy filed a motion
for execution before the
MCTC. Revilla opposed
the motion.

The COMELEC Second
Division issued its Order
denying Revillas motion,
being a second motion for
reconsideration.
ISSUE: Whether or not
the dismissal of Revillas
appeal was proper.

RULING: The dismissal
of Revillas appeal was
improper.
The Orders are null and
void as they were issued
by a division of the
COMELEC, instead of the
COMELEC en banc, pursu-
ant to Article IX-C, Sec-
tion 3, of the 1987 Con-
stitution and to Rule 19,
Sections 5 and 6, of the
COMELEC Rules of Proce-
dure. This rule should
apply whether the motion
fee has been paid or not.
It is the COMELEC en
banc, not the division,
which has the discretion
either to refuse to take
action until the motion fee
is paid, or to dismiss the
action or proceeding.

Revillas payment of the
appeal fee before the
MCTC already perfected
his appeal pursuant to
A.M. No. 07-4-15-SC
(Rules of Procedure in
Election Contests Before
the Courts Involving Elec-
tive Municipal and Baran-
gay Officials). The non-
payment or the insuffi-
cient payment of the ad-
ditional appeal fee to the
COMELEC Cash Division
does not affect the per-
fection of the appeal and
does not result in the out-
right or ipso facto dismis-
sal of the appeal. Under
Rule 22, Section 9(a), of
the COMELEC Rules, the
appeal may be dismissed.
And under Rule 40, Sec-
tion 18 of the same rules,
if the fees are not paid,
the COMELEC may refuse
to take action thereon
until they are paid and
may dismiss the action or
the proceeding. Consid-
ering that the payment of
the appeal fee was made
three and a half months
before the issuance of the
clarificatory COMELEC
Resolution No. 8486 and
after the perfection of the
appeal, the dismissal of
the appeal by the COME-
LEC Second Division as
grave abuse of its discre-
tion.



SPOUSES OMAR and
MOSHIERA LATIP
versus
ROSALIE PALAA
CHUA
G.R. No. 177809 Octo-
ber 16, 2009



FACTS: Rosalie Chua
(Rosalie) is the owner of
Roferxane Building in Pa-
raaque City.

Rosalie filed a complaint
for unlawful detainer plus
damages against Spouses
Omar and Moshiera Latip
(Spouses Latip). Rosalie
attached to the com-
plaint a contract of lease
over two cubicles in
Roferxane Bldg., signed
by Rosalie, as lessor, and
by Spouses Latip, as les-
sees thereof.

A year after the com-
mencement of the lease
and with Spouses Latip
already occupying the
leased cubicles, Rosalie,
through counsel, sent
the spouses a letter de-
manding payment of
back rentals. When
Spouses Latip did not
heed Rosalies demand,
she instituted an action.

The Metropolitan Trial
Court (MeTC) ruled in
favor of Rosalie.

The Regional Trial Court
(RTC) reversed the MeTC
and ruled in favor of
Spouses Latip.

The Court of Appeals
reversed the RTC and
reinstated the decision of
the MeTC.
ISSUE: Whether or not
Spouses Latip should be
ejected from the leased
cubicles.

RULING: Spouses Latip
should be ejected from
the leased premises.
There is nothing on the
receipts and on record
that the payment and re-
ceipt referred to full pay-
ment of rentals for the
whole period of the lease.
All three receipts state
Rosalies receipt of cash in
varying amounts. The first
receipt did state payment
for two (2) cubicles, but
this cannot mean full pay-
ment of rentals for the
entire lease period when
there are no words to that
effect. Further, two re-
ceipts were subsequently
executed pointing to the
obvious fact that the first
payment made is not for
full payment of rentals.
Thus, since the contract
of lease remained opera-
tive, Rosalies receipt of
the monies should be con-
sidered as advanced rent-
als on the leased cubicles.
This conclusion is bol-
stered by the fact that
Rosalie demanded pay-
ment of the lease rentals
only a full year after the
commencement of the
lease.

The lease ended in 2005.
Consequently, Spouses
Latip can be ejected from
the leased premises.
They are liable to Rosalie
for unpaid rentals on the
lease of the two (2) cubi-
cles in accordance with
the stipulations on rent-
als in the Contract of
Lease. However, the
amount covering ad-
vance rentals, must be
deducted from this liabil-
ity of Spouses Latip to
Rosalie.
JOSEPH TYPINGCO
versus
LINA WONG LIM, JER-
RY SYCHINGHO,
JACKSON SYCHINGHO,
JOHNSON SYCH-
INGHO,
and FAR EAST BANK
AND TRUST COMPANY
Page 8
LCA LINES
Page 9 VOLUME II, ISSUE No. 10
G.R. No. 181232
October 23, 2009




FACTS: Spouses Lina
Wong Lim (Lina) and
Johnson Sychingho
(Johnson) borrowed
from Joseph Typingco
(Typingco) the sum of
US$600,000 which was
later restructured, pay-
able on or before De-
cember 31, 1997, un-
der a promissory note
executed by the spous-
es and co-signed by
their children-co-
respondents Jerry
Sychingho (Jerry) and
Jackson Sychingho
(Jackson) as sureties.

Following their default
in payment, Lina, Jer-
ry, and Jackson con-
veyed on January 29,
1998 to Typingco via
dacion en pago their
house and lot in
Greenhills, San Juan
(subject property), in
the name of Lina and
her sons, after first
paying Far East Bank
and Trust Company
(FEBTC) the balance of
a promissory note to
clear the title of a Real
Estate Mortgage anno-
tated thereon in favor of
FEBTC.

Typingcos repeated de-
mands for the delivery of
the owners duplicate
copy of the title. Having
remained unheeded, he
filed a complaint for spe-
cific performance and
recovery of the title
against respondents
Sychinghos and FEBTC.


The Regional Trial Court
dismissed the complaint.
Typingco filed a Motion
for Reconsideration but
the same was denied.

ISSUE: Whether or not
Sychinghos has the right
to sell or convey title to
the subject property at
the time of the dacion en
pago.


RULING: Sychinghos
has the right to sell or
convey title to the subject
property at the time of
the dacion en pago.

Dacion en pago is the de-
livery and transmission of
ownership of another
thing by the debtor to the
creditor as an accepted
equivalent of performance
of an obligation. It par-
takes of the nature of a
contract of sale, where
the thing offered by the
debtor is the object of the
contract, while the debt is
the consideration or pur-
chase price.


There having been no
previous foreclosure of
the Real Estate Mortgage
on the subject property,
Sychinghos ownership
thereof remained intact.
Indeed, a mortgage does
not affect the ownership
of the property as it is
nothing more than a lien
thereon serving as securi-
ty for a debt. The mort-
gagee does not acquire
title to the mortgaged real
estate unless he purchas-
es it at a public auction,
and it is not redeemed
within the period provided
for by the Rules of Court.
This applies a fortiori to
the present case where
only 1/3, not the whole,
of the subject property
was actually encumbered
to FEBTC.

Since Typingco agreed to
the full extinguishment of
spouses then outstanding
obligation in view of the
unconditional conveyance
to him of the subject
property, there is a per-
fected and enforceable
dacion en pago. He
should thus enjoy full en-
titlement to the subject
property.













LAGUNDI-CARONAN AND ASSOC.
LCA LINES
October 2009



Www.lagundi-caronan-assoc.com
LAGUNDI-CARONAN AND ASSOCIATES
Rhem Square Bldg.
Carig sur
Tuguegarao City

WORK QUALIFICATION TEST



Jeoffrey applied for a CPA position at a Philippine firm based in Hong
Kong.
An American applied for the same job and both applicants having
the same qualifications were asked to take a test by the Department
manager.
Upon completion of the test both men only missed one of the ques-
tions. The manager went to Jeoffrey and said.
Manager:
Thank you for your interest, but weve decided to give the Ameri-
can the job
Jeoffrey: And why would you be doing that?
We both got nine questions correct.
This being a Philippine firm and me being a Filipino, I should get the
job!
Manager: We have made our decisions not on the correct answers,
but on the question you missed.
Jeoffrey: And just how would one incorrect answer be better than
the other?
Manager: Simple, the American put down on question #5, I dont
know., You put down Neither do I.
HAPPY HALLOWEEN